Health and Quality of Life Outcomes BioMed Central Open Access Research Fatigue characteristics in multiple sclerosis: the North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) survey Olympia Hadjimichael1, Timothy Vollmer2 and MerriKay Oleen-Burkey*3 Address: 1Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, USA, 2Barrow Neurological Institute, CMSC/ NARCOMS Project, Phoenix, AZ 85013, USA and 3Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Teva Neuroscience, Inc., Kansas City, MO 64131, USA Email: Olympia Hadjimichael - ohadjimichael@gmail.com; Timothy Vollmer - timothy.vollmer@uchsc.edu; MerriKay OleenBurkey* - merrikay.oleenburkey@tevaneuro.com * Corresponding author Published: 14 November 2008 Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6:100 doi:10.1186/1477-7525-6-100 Received: 30 April 2008 Accepted: 14 November 2008 This article is available from: http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/100 © 2008 Hadjimichael et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited Abstract Background: Fatigue is a common disabling symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS) and has a significantly negative impact on quality of life Persons with MS enrolled in the North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) Patient Registry are invited to complete follow-up surveys every six months to update their original registration information One of these surveys was designed to focus on the severity and impact of fatigue, and its association with other clinical parameters of MS such as physical disability Methods: In addition to the usual data collected in Registry update surveys such as demographic characteristics, MS-related medical history, disability and handicap, immunomodulatory and symptomatic therapies taken, and healthcare services used, the survey for this study included two validated self-report fatigue scales, the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) and questions about the use of symptomatic management for fatigue, both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments This Registry update survey was mailed to all NARCOMS registrants (n = 18,595) in November 2002 Information provided by registry participants was approved for research purposes by the Yale University Institutional Review Board Results: The response rate for the survey was 49.5% (9205/18,595) Severe fatigue as measured with the FSS using the developer's recommended severity cutpoint of ≥ 36 was reported by 6691 (74%) of evaluable respondents (n = 9077) A higher prevalence of severe fatigue was observed in relapsing-worsening MS compared with relapsing-stable and primary progressive MS A distinct pattern of fatigue was observed across the disability levels of the Patient-Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) Although there were no differences in the severity or impact of fatigue by immunomodulatory agents (IMA), respondents who recalled therapy changes in the prior six months reported different patterns of change in fatigue with lower fatigue levels reported after changing from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate than after changing from glatiramer acetate to interferon-β Concomitant therapy for fatigue was used by 47.2% of the 5799 survey respondents receiving IMA Conclusion: Characterizing MS symptoms like fatigue can increase awareness about their impact on persons with MS and suggest recommendations for a care plan Page of 11 (page number not for citation purposes) Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6:100 Background Chronic fatigue is one of the most common disabling symptoms among persons with multiple sclerosis (MS), interfering with, and considerably limiting, daily activities [1,2] At least 65% of persons with MS experience fatigue on a daily basis, usually during the afternoons [3-6], and 15%–40% report it as the most disabling MS symptom [4,5,7-9] MS fatigue is different from fatigue in healthy subjects [7,10], difficult to define, and therefore one of the most challenging symptoms to treat No biologic or neuro-imaging markers for fatigue are currently known, and its pathophysiology and etiology are poorly understood Both peripheral and central mechanisms may have a role [11-15] Fatigue has a significant negative impact on daily work, family life, and social activities of persons with MS and is associated with the perception of an impaired general health, mental state, and quality of life (QOL) [16-18] It appears to have an even more important effect on QOL than physical disability alone [18-20] Studies of fatigue in association with other MS clinical characteristics, such as physical disability [8,21,22], depression [21,22], or disease subtype [4,8,9,21], report contradictory findings Symptomatic management of MS fatigue includes both non-pharmacologic treatments, such as exercise and keeping cool [1], as well as pharmacologic treatments, such as amantadine and modafinil [2] The current study examined the characteristics of fatigue among persons with MS in the North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) Patient Registry, a project of the Consortium of MS Centers (CMSC) A longitudinal database initiated in 1996, the Registry is a resource for clinical trials and long-term prospective studies [23-27] As of 2008, the Registry is comprised of more than 33,000 patients and provides a unique opportunity to study MS characteristics and treatment patterns in a large population of persons with MS The aims of this study were to: (1) evaluate the severity and impact of fatigue among NARCOMS registrants and characterize the differences between those reporting mild/ moderate fatigue and severe fatigue; (2) assess the association between the severity and impact of fatigue and physical disability; (3) investigate respondents' perceptions of fatigue levels when changing immunomodulatory agents (IMA); and (4) evaluate the prevalence and pattern of symptomatic management of fatigue Methods Persons with MS living in the US are recruited voluntarily to the NARCOMS registry through the registry's website, the National MS Society, MS centers, and support groups http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/100 The validity of the MS diagnosis was recently confirmed in 98.7 ± 1.3% of the validation sample [28] Data collected in the registry include demographic information, MSrelated medical history, disability and handicap, immunomodulatory and symptomatic therapies taken, and healthcare services used Following enrollment, the Registry is updated with surveys that are sent to participants every months [23,24] The current study is based on a single Registry update survey that was mailed to all NARCOMS registrants (n = 18,595) in November 2002 Information provided by registry participants was approved for research purposes by the Yale University Institutional Review Board (IRB) The IRB granted approval for an information statement in lieu of formal informed consent The Information Page accompanying each survey requested a participant's signature to acknowledge the intended use of the information and was worded as follows: "By signing below, I give my permission for the following information to be entered into the NARCOMS MS Registry I understand that this information will be used for research purposes only, and that all responses will be kept private and confidential I am willing to be notified of any studies for which I may be eligible." This Registry update survey included a special section on fatigue The most reliable and valid fatigue measures, the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) [4,29,30], were incorporated into the survey, along with a question designed to capture the registrants' perceptions of fatigue levels following changes from one IMA to another when that had occurred in the previous six months Survey measures MS-subtype Participants in the NARCOMS registry are assigned a disease subtype based on the presence of relapses in the course of their disease and their disease progression The first MS subtype, primary progressive disease, is defined as continuous accumulation of disability with no relapses throughout the disease course Relapsing-stable disease is defined as having a relapse anytime throughout the disease course and reporting a disability state that is improved or similar to that observed a year earlier Relapsing-worsening disease is defined as having a relapse anytime throughout the disease course and reporting a disability state that has worsened during the previous year Fatigue The impact of fatigue on the respondent's daily activities was assessed with the MFIS, a 21-item scale that defines fatigue as a "feeling of physical tiredness and lack of energy that many people experience from time to time" [4,30] Each item is rated by the respondent on a scale Page of 11 (page number not for citation purposes) Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6:100 from (never) to (almost always) Scores are calculated for each of its three subscales: – physical (9 items, cumulative score range 0–36), cognitive (10 items, cumulative score range 0–40), and psychosocial (2 items, cumulative score range 0–8), and combined for a total MFIS score (range 0–84) [4,30] Fatigue severity was measured with the FSS, a 9-item scale; each item is rated on a scale from (strongly disagree) to (strongly agree) with the total score ranging from 9–63 [29] The scale developer defines severe fatigue as an FSS score ≥ 36 (an average of ≥ across the nine questions) while mild/moderate fatigue is defined as FSS < 36 [29,31] Mobility and neurologic impairment Neurologic impairment and mobility status were assessed in the survey using two validated self-report instruments which are included in each Registry update survey Performance Scales are a measure of handicap in twelve domains of neurologic function: mobility, hand function, vision, fatigue, cognition, bladder/bowel, sensory, spasticity, pain, depression, tremor/loss of coordination, and anxiety All domains except mobility are assessed by respondents on a scale of (normal) to (total disability) Mobility is measured on a (normal) to (total gait disability) scale [32] Mobility impairment was measured with the PatientDetermined Disease Steps (PDDS), which uses a (normal) to (bedridden) scale [32,33] The PDDS, although self-reported, is highly correlated with the physicianreported Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) [34], and defines more precisely than the EDSS mid-range mobility These scales were used to assess the correlation between PDDS and fatigue level, as well as the differences in fatigue levels based on the PDDS Fatigue and changes in IMA The impact and severity of fatigue were examined relative to treatment with IMA along with the level of fatigue associated with changes in IMA IMA included glatiramer acetate (Copaxone®) and the interferons: IFN-β-1a (Avonex® and Rebif®), and IFN-β-1b (Betaseron®) Fatigue associated with therapy change was assessed with a scale of (much less) to (much greater), with a higher score indicating a higher level of fatigue following the change in therapy A regression analysis was conducted to assess factors that could contribute to a change in fatigue under these circumstances Symptomatic treatments of fatigue The use of symptomatic treatments for fatigue, both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic, was collected in the http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/100 survey Non-pharmacologic treatment options included the use of an exercise program and physical and occupational therapy Statistical analysis Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistical techniques Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratio estimates of the strength of the association between each dichotomous independent variable and the fatigue score, after controlling for the other variables in the model (age, use of symptomatic drugs, PDDS, duration of IMA use, disease duration, and disease subtypes) In addition, a separate regression analysis was conducted to assess factors that may contribute to changes in fatigue level after changes in IMAs Results The surveys were completed by 9205 (49.5%) registrants To be evaluable, the survey had to have all fatigue questions answered and the respondent had to report treatment with an IMA or be treatment-naïve (n = 9077) The registrants who did not respond to the survey were similar to the respondents in mean age, gender distribution, disease duration, and education The majority (65%) of the non-responders had been classified as having relapsingworsening MS on the last completed Registry survey, and their mean PDDS score was 3.78 (early cane) Fatigue severity and impact On the basis of the FSS scores, respondents were categorized into two levels of fatigue: mild/moderate (< 36) or severe (≥ 36) fatigue Nearly 74% of the sample reported severe fatigue As shown in Table those with severe fatigue were more likely to be older, male, with an education level of associate degree or less, unemployed, diagnosed at an older age, and report more disability on the PDDS (p < 0001) than those with mild/moderate fatigue Only 29.0% of those with severe fatigue reported being employed compared to 54.6% of those with mild/moderate fatigue The level of fatigue also differed between the MS disease subtypes A higher prevalence of severe fatigue was observed in persons with relapsing-worsening MS (59.8%) than among the other two subtypes More respondents with severe fatigue (46.5%) were treated with symptomatic drugs than those with mild/moderate fatigue (18.2%) The impact of fatigue as measured with the MFIS was notably higher among those with severe fatigue as shown in Table The mean total MFIS score as well as each of the mean MFIS subscale scores for physical, cognitive, and psychosocial fatigue were more than twice as high among those with severe fatigue as among those with mild/moderate fatigue Correspondingly, respondents with relapsing-worsening disease who were shown to have the most Page of 11 (page number not for citation purposes) Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6:100 http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/100 Table 1: Demographic and MS characteristics among NARCOMS respondents by fatigue severitya Mild/Moderate Fatigue (N = 2386) Severe Fatigue (N = 6691) P value 45.8 (± 11) 48.3 (± 10)